I'm very sorry about this inconvenience. Your case will be considered, so don't panic. If you'd like, you can send me your essay by email. My question is, the essay that is on apply.sabf.org.ar is the essay you tried to submit, right? I mean, is it finished?

Transplant medicine has always been a double-edged sword: a blessing in
disguise, a blade in bold. Prior to this, the organ harvesting market
evolves around 3 simple questions: "Where do I a kidney?" "Hush, want a
kidney?" "Do you have enough money for a kidney?" Evidently, the priority
of transplant medicine lies in the equilibrium between supply and demand,
and in short, is very much business. The sources of organs include the
death-row prisoners, and many more unexplained, sparking speculations that
most are obtained illegally from victims who are persuaded, lured and
trafficked. Over the years, many are horrified at the controversial
prospect of exploiting the poor, the disadvantaged and thus, have openly
condemned the practice of selling organs to the wealthier nations at
various global occasions. Along with great efforts, world governments have
passed and enforced many agreements and bills of legal framework to seek a
balance between reduce suffering, advocating utilitarianism and equal human
rights.

Most importantly, such practices are gradually hampered and reaching a halt
as 3D bioprinting surfaces, widely claimed to be the gold standard of
solving the issues of a long wait list and matching donors while saving
millions of lives. Bioprinting is a new technology developed primarily to
rapidly manufacture artificial organs via 3D printing method by
constructing a particular organ layer-by-layer to form biological
microstructures that resemble a natural organ anatomically and
functionally. The obvious advantages are the likelihood of eradicating
organ harvesting black market and the capability of protecting the poor
from exploitation.

When 3D printing first gained global attention in 2012, no one has the
slightest clue about building something great, besides producing some
miniature legoes that hopefully fit together, let alone revolutionizing an
entire industry. However, our world just proved the impact of a visionary
innovation and how fast science progresses. Today, as the terms "empathetic
healthcare", "personalised care" and "tailored treatment" dominate the
medical profession, we see a future of surgical transplant medicine fading
into background, replaced by 2-dimensional images that are structuralized
into reality. Suddenly, clinicians and bioengineers are printing perfectly
functioning bone tissues from mere existing scan results. Furthermore, this
technology has proven visionary as many medical schools are contemplating
about allowing students to practise their skills on artificial tissue
scaffolds while studying the effects of drugs and their metabolism in real
time. Moreover, many in the United States are taking a step ahead,
considering the possibility of replacing prosthetics with bionic limbs to
improve quality of life among war veterans.

The potential of organ printing is promising with an endless
possibility. However,
ethical issues are dismayingly legion. While many resented the idea of
exploiting others' organs, the society is unable to decide what it thinks
about 3D bioprinting. Among many, 3 ethical challenges are commonly
elaborated.

1.

Is it safe?

This technology is undoubtedly new with tremendous room for growth. What do
we currently know? We are informed that the materials are made of either
our own or others' stem cells to promote cell multiplication and tissue
regeneration while eliminating the risk of organ rejection which leads to
the required use of lifelong steroids and consequently, potentially fatal
immunosuppression, like in traditional organ transplants. They are
therefore designed to be specifically compatible with our bodies. However,
such technology has not, and cannot undergo a sizable clinical trial on the
healthy population. This is because, like a bespoke customized suit, organ
printing derived from stem cells are highly specific and individualised.
Therefore, even if the artificial organs are proven to be safe and
effective for use now, we will not be able to discover how long they would
be safe for.

1.

Regulations and laws

While some dystopians are alarmed as we defy natural selections, many
more celebrate
the idea of alleviating suffering. However, the most pressing matter is d
efining the purpose of an artificial organ which warrants ethical debates.
Some scientists are ready to escalate the progress of technology, to
discover a new anatomical direction – the idea of enhancing bodily functions,
while businessmen desire to ride the tide of business opportunities in
organ mass production. Do we design an artificial organ with the mere purpose
of restoring functions, or to change the world by enhancing our abilities? Just
like the gene-editing artificial fertilization technology that helps to
eliminate genetic diseases yet choosing what genes are worthy to pass down,
people are able to select what they want. Looking forward to a leap of
faith, many push for organs that function beyond human capacities. They
talk about the possibility of constructing livers that metabolizes ethanol
instantaneously, hearts that pump fast enough to support a football team of
Usain Bolt(s) and physiques that scream endurance. We certainly worry about
not only the inhumane amplification of strength, but also the abuse of such
power. Most importantly, our agony lies in the possibility of weaponization
of both the bionic devies and ultimately, human ourselves, which
potentially becomes a trigger of disruption to the peace our ancestors have
thrived so hard to achieve in the past 50 years.

While unable to judge what is right, regulatory committee must be set up
soon to monitor the direction of bioprinting under the scrutiny of laws and
policies before it goes astray and uncontrolled.

1.

Who gets access?

Ask ourselves this question: Should the wealthy be able to live their lives
as they wish and buy a liver in the future, while the poor lives cautiously
only to die in vain later on? As replacing our organs with the enhanced one
inevitably becomes a trend in future, those without financial background
will most likely lose out at competing from the very beginning. The
implementation of organ printing easily highlights, if not widens, the
wealth disparities between the rich and the poor. It divides the society. This
technology is new, revolutionizing, and certainly an expensive one. Without
governmental subsidy, only the financially resourceful will have access to
this innovation. It is saddening because although life encompasses many
values, economic status will most probably become the strongest determinant in
deciding who is most worthy of evolving.

Even if the national council approves endowment, who qualifies for an
artificial organ- the war veterans or the congenitally limbless infant? Who
decide- the doctors, the patients or the government? How do we ensure a
fair distribution of healthcare provision and justice in this case? We need
a definite answer to these questions.

In conclusion, 3D bioprinting has certainly transformed the industry
of transplant
medicine and leading the path with an exciting future of uncertainty. Are
some people's existence based on the sole purpose of selling a part of them?
No. This is why the world has put tremendous effort in fighting against
illegal organ trades. However, as the power of organ printing emerges, the
society seems to experience a misplaced sense of what is morally
right. Therefore,
it is of utmost quintessence to strike a clear, holistic balance between
justice and empathy before reaching a general consensus of our
attitudes towards
this revolutionizing technology, as a society. More studies must be
conducted to thoroughly understand the consequences of widely
implementing organ
printing. For now, all we can say is both the society and technology will
adapt eventually. Personally, although technology has advanced
exponentially, both traditional transplant medicine and 3D bioprinting
share similar roots of concern: safety, justice and its ultimate purpose.
Maybe we haven't progressed much in humanity, have we?